Siege Fatigue ( Realism In AoC Sieges?)

ArchivedUser

So in this discussion, I want to talk about sieges, the cost of sieges and how I would like to see seasons affect the ways to siege. For years I've been wanting an MMO that had realism and meaning to siege or just to pvp in general which all have failed, examples being ESO and GW2 when you lost a keep you never cared what you lost. If you are like me you've wanted the same exact thing to experience heavy clashes with the enemy or to apply real tactics rather than just zerg till you die. I love that in AoC sieges will take time resources knowledge and Alliances.        When I think about sieges in AoC it ignites that flame I use to have, seeing walls break apart arrows and magic spells flying at you seeing the enemy flee into their keep UGH!!! THE RUSH!! One thing that has sparked my interest is what I like to call siege fatigue, the possibility of running out of supplies either due to lack of knowledge or maybe your supplies got burnt by a stealthy rogue or who knows maybe you have a Jabba the Hutt in your Guild eating all of the rations lol. Another thing I would like to see is seasons affecting the siege itself. If you raid in winter your troops may suffer a stamina but the defenders will lose supply faster due to the siege and the harsh winter may harm supply routes.So both sides suffer positives and negatives.

Sorry if my punctuation and sentence structure triggers you I know I'm not the greatest at this but hopefully some good discussions can happen =] 

ArchivedUser

I will honestly say I didn't read, I'm sorry, but this seems like a huge wall. Please break into paragraphs.

There is only so much realism I like in my fantasy games. I prefer more realism in survival games, but Ashes is not a Survival Sim.

ArchivedUser

Read it You are fine, no worries.

I played a lot of RvRvR in DAoC back in 2001. I mained a rouge-like class that could climb walls and cause damage from behind enemy lines. Good stealth mechanics were crucial, and weather would seriously impact this dynamic gameplay. 

 I could see a siege going either way honestly, and to have the weather impact it could be incredibly interesting. Although, if you are cut off from your trade routes, a well stocked and managed city could still hold out for sometime against would-be attackers. I just hope that the siege mechanic have depth.

As a caveat, I have admittently stopped following this project since the kickstarter, not out of a lack of interest, but due to school and other responsibilities. As it is, I am likely one of the more uninformed backers and do not have a great deal of knowledge in regards to siege mechanics in their current state.

ArchivedUser

There is quite a bit of information out there that would allow people to start to theorycraft about what sieges might be starting to look like. Certain things we will see, other things mentioned so far by the OP we can pretty much guarantee will not be there. Could the be added later down the line? Sure, they could add exploding elephants and moats with sharks with freaking lazer beam helmets, just not at launch, and most likely not ever. I will link a bunch of Discord quotes about siege mechanics after this, and recommend looking at the early May/June livestreams/interviews when they were actually dropping some good information to keep people interested in the game. Please remember that castle siege mechanics and node siege mechanics follow very different rulesets and timelines.













TL;DR: Do research before just wishlisting, saves time and energy for everyone involved to not have to debunk bs.

ArchivedUser

 Im just salivating at the amount of chatter/shock/angst that will be generated when the first town/city falls to a siege and the mayors/officials of that town lose everything....so awesome.

ArchivedUser

Taxes generated by the node can NOT be looted by mayors/officials. Anyone who is a citizen of a node that is razed has a chance to lose a percentage of farmed/gathered goods that will go to the attackers in the form of redeemable certificates. No one is going to "lose everything." In city housing may be destroyed, but the template of what decorations and layout will still be available to place somewhere else. Same goes for freeholds that may be destroyed. While people who belong to that node may be rightfully pissed off that work they have put in over time has gone "poof", it was not without significant effort by an equally determined group that paid in time and resources to do it. The idea that roaming hordes are going to be able to just go from node to node reducing shit to rubble is just wrong. You will need to have resources available to you to initiate sieges. The people that are coming from survival mmos that are full loot destructible fests like ARK or Conan Exiles are going to be in for a bit of a letdown when they find out that they just can't wait for people to go offline then loot and pillage as they please.

ArchivedUser

UnknownSystemError said:

Taxes generated by the node can NOT be looted by mayors/officials. Anyone who is a citizen of a node that is razed has a chance to lose a percentage of farmed/gathered goods that will go to the attackers in the form of redeemable certificates. No one is going to "lose everything." In city housing may be destroyed, but the template of what decorations and layout will still be available to place somewhere else. Same goes for freeholds that may be destroyed. While people who belong to that node may be rightfully pissed off that work they have put in over time has gone "poof", it was not without significant effort by an equally determined group that paid in time and resources to do it. The idea that roaming hordes are going to be able to just go from node to node reducing shit to rubble is just wrong. You will need to have resources available to you to initiate sieges. The people that are coming from survival mmos that are full loot destructible fests like ARK or Conan Exiles are going to be in for a bit of a letdown when they find out that they just can't wait for people to go offline then loot and pillage as they please.

In a sense you're right but when it comes to losing everything it is still possible. 
Think about the prestige housing someone had in that metro. That person dug his heels in from stage 1 and up to get that mansion.

Now the node has been wiped clean and those citizens have to find another place to settle. 

Who is to say if that mansion owner could get in early again to claim his corner of the city he had before.  Just one way I see it. 

ArchivedUser

makinoji said:

UnknownSystemError said:

Taxes generated by the node can NOT be looted by mayors/officials. Anyone who is a citizen of a node that is razed has a chance to lose a percentage of farmed/gathered goods that will go to the attackers in the form of redeemable certificates. No one is going to "lose everything." In city housing may be destroyed, but the template of what decorations and layout will still be available to place somewhere else. Same goes for freeholds that may be destroyed. While people who belong to that node may be rightfully pissed off that work they have put in over time has gone "poof", it was not without significant effort by an equally determined group that paid in time and resources to do it. The idea that roaming hordes are going to be able to just go from node to node reducing shit to rubble is just wrong. You will need to have resources available to you to initiate sieges. The people that are coming from survival mmos that are full loot destructible fests like ARK or Conan Exiles are going to be in for a bit of a letdown when they find out that they just can't wait for people to go offline then loot and pillage as they please.

In a sense you're right but when it comes to losing everything it is still possible. 
Think about the prestige housing someone had in that metro. That person dug his heels in from stage 1 and up to get that mansion.

Now the node has been wiped clean and those citizens have to find another place to settle. 

Who is to say if that mansion owner could get in early again to claim his corner of the city he had before.  Just one way I see it. 

Well if you think about it when one Town falls another will rise again. Sure you may not be able to get your mansion spot right away but the opportunity will always be there. I like that this game will always give you something to strive for rather then just giving people whatever they want because they're wallet warriors.

ArchivedUser

I think the problem here is people think that taking down nodes through the siege mechanic is going to be something that happens every day on a "I just feels like smacking some bitches!" impulse from some pvp brahs looking to get their zerg on. We still have no confirmation that a lost siege levels a node back to 0 or just reduces the node a level or two depending on the amount of damage done or siege goals achieved. Taking down a metropolis is not going to be, "Oh look, those 1000 active people managed over the course of months to a year and half to make it level 6, let's go knock it down for shits and giggles!" It will be something that would need a shitton of organization, resources spent on the siege declaration, coordination over the just under a week declaration period, and a bunch of luck to take out all the objectives in the two hour siege window. Nodes just do not get to a high level and go dormant. From what we have been told they need a constant flow of exp and resources to not delevel, so to achieve a higher level, they have to have active players supporting it, not just signed up as citizens, but active, online players.

ArchivedUser

UnknownSystemError said:

There is quite a bit of information out there that would allow people to start to theorycraft about what sieges might be starting to look like. Certain things we will see, other things mentioned so far by the OP we can pretty much guarantee will not be there. Could the be added later down the line? Sure, they could add exploding elephants and moats with sharks with freaking lazer beam helmets, just not at launch, and most likely not ever. I will link a bunch of Discord quotes about siege mechanics after this, and recommend looking at the early May/June livestreams/interviews when they were actually dropping some good information to keep people interested in the game. Please remember that castle siege mechanics and node siege mechanics follow very different rulesets and timelines.













TL;DR: Do research before just wishlisting, saves time and energy for everyone involved to not have to debunk bs.

Thank you for all of the Discord messages I really appreciate it. I am worried however with that a siege will only last 2 hours. I have fought for keep longer then that in ESO and with a 2hr time limit I fill like it will force the siege to just zerg to capture certain points rather than using actual strategy. I hate the zerg mentality pvp has came to over the years. It's boring and requires no skill. In ESO it was spam puncturing jabs then Jesus beam people to death. I hope this game requires skill and knowledge over zerg and spam.

ArchivedUser

I feel it would be the other way around.
Random "zerging" will prevent objectives from being done efficiently and will allow the citizens, who likely prepared for said siege, to defend way more efficiently.

"Wow, that was easy. Did these guys even try to communicate?" -Node Defender #3

ArchivedUser

UnknownSystemError said:

I think the problem here is people think that taking down nodes through the siege mechanic is going to be something that happens every day on a "I just feels like smacking some bitches!" impulse from some pvp brahs looking to get their zerg on. We still have no confirmation that a lost siege levels a node back to 0 or just reduces the node a level or two depending on the amount of damage done or siege goals achieved. Taking down a metropolis is not going to be, "Oh look, those 1000 active people managed over the course of months to a year and half to make it level 6, let's go knock it down for shits and giggles!" It will be something that would need a shitton of organization, resources spent on the siege declaration, coordination over the just under a week declaration period, and a bunch of luck to take out all the objectives in the two hour siege window. Nodes just do not get to a high level and go dormant. From what we have been told they need a constant flow of exp and resources to not delevel, so to achieve a higher level, they have to have active players supporting it, not just signed up as citizens, but active, online players.

I like that nodes require constant resources to maintain. It's almost like in survival games with base decay it keeps guilds or players with a lot of time on their hands being completely dominant over all. However I stand by my opinion that they need to increase siege timers. I mean 2 hours is nothing for a siege. Especially if you are waiting for your ally's to reach you or to develop a counter strike.

ArchivedUser

As long as they include an emote that allows us to lift our kilts at the enemy I'm happy.

But I really am seeing a similar system to how Archeage did castle sieges, where it's on a weekly schedule, with a predetermined time where the actual fighting happens.

I also suspect resources will play a roll too, maybe in NPC soldiers or respawns for each team. Maybe the attackers need to being and set up siege equipment but the ammo they have is based in how good their supply line is. 

I'm also fantasizing about "siege breaking" mechanics where the defenders need supplies smuggled in from the outside unless they stockpiled enough before hand. 

ArchivedUser

Azathoth said:

I feel it would be the other way around.
Random "zerging" will prevent objectives from being done efficiently and will allow the citizens, who likely prepared for said siege, to defend way more efficiently.

"Wow, that was easy. Did these guys even try to communicate?" -Node Defender #3

True. Also depends on the efficiency of the defenders leadership. The way it sounds it will take a few guilds to actually manage a metropolis so it will really come down to communication and the leadership of those guilds. If you have conflict between some guilds that manage the metropolis then it may fall.

ArchivedUser

Karthos said:

As long as they include an emote that allows us to lift our kilts at the enemy I'm happy.

But I really am seeing a similar system to how Archeage did castle sieges, where it's on a weekly schedule, with a predetermined time where the actual fighting happens.

I also suspect resources will play a roll too, maybe in NPC soldiers or respawns for each team. Maybe the attackers need to being and set up siege equipment but the ammo they have is based in how good their supply line is. 

I'm also fantasizing about "siege breaking" mechanics where the defenders need supplies smuggled in from the outside unless they stockpiled enough before hand. 

Oh like attacking the defenders trade routes? I like that! I would also like to be able to soften the enemy up before the siege and attack their caravans so they not only lose goods but then have to use resources to buy mercenaries.
 think each node type will also determine how to siege especially the metropolises.

Also I approve of the braveheart emote lol but if they did that I would like a bush slider haha

ArchivedUser

They have said that they actual siege timer may change over the course of testing. If it is found to be too short or too long then they will adjust it. Siege windows will take into account the timezone the server is located in with I believe the choice of when the siege is to occur determined by the attackers that fits into what is seen as the "most active" server times to stop people from scheduling things while the majority of the server is sleeping or offline. Sieges do not just happen once they are declared, there is a couple to several day preparation window for people to know about it. There was mention (not confirmed) of a notification mechanic outside of game possible that a node you are a citizen of is coming under attack at such and such date at such and such time. We do have the quote above that certain siege events or mechanics may be "gated" to prevent zerging. This will all be worked out over the course of the next two years of testing. If destroying stuff is found to be to easy, exploits are found, (think of ESO early days and DK being able to chain people off of walls or jump over them), certain city defenses are too strong, or key siege npc raid bosses unkillable, it will be adjusted and buffed or nerfed to find a balance that everyone likes. Just like they have said that combat is not going to be stealthroot, backstab, cc, backstab, and dead for pvp, I am sure that they will find the balance over time before the game is given to the unwashed masses to try and exploit and break at live launch.

ArchivedUser

@TYRwarGOD, I am hoping that guilds aren't managing metropolises. They can go build castles and do guildy stuff on their own. If they want to all join in a citizenship together and help build/defend the node together, awesome, but if they want to own the node I'm looking for a new home... Just because they are, theoretically, super buddies and think they are cool doesn't mean I do.

Also, I think the 2 hour window is to prevent zergs and make the attackers come together. Making the window longer just draws out an intense encounter. Honestly, how long do you think a siege should last?

Guild wars will also have "Win Conditions" if I remember correctly, so it's not like two guilds are going to be able to maintain a constant war against each other either.

ArchivedUser

This is now a year old, and until we get updated information over the next few months is what we have to work with. So no attacking their caravans, since trade will be suspended in the days leading up to the siege.


Edit: Went back and found this. How housing is affected due to siege loss or win. Timestamp at 40:00. 5 minutes or so of clarification.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb9g7nS_1Ok

ArchivedUser

UnknownSystemError said:

This is now a year old, and until we get updated information over the next few months is what we have to work with. So no attacking their caravans, since trade will be suspended in the days leading up to the siege.


Edit: Went back and found this. How housing is affected due to siege loss or win. Timestamp at 40:00. 5 minutes or so of clarification.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cb9g7nS_1Ok

Right. But i'm talking about before actually starting a siege attack caravans and weaken their economy then start the siege.

ArchivedUser

Azathoth said:

@TYRwarGOD, I am hoping that guilds aren't managing metropolises. They can go build castles and do guildy stuff on their own. If they want to all join in a citizenship together and help build/defend the node together, awesome, but if they want to own the node I'm looking for a new home... Just because they are, theoretically, super buddies and think they are cool doesn't mean I do.

Also, I think the 2 hour window is to prevent zergs and make the attackers come together. Making the window longer just draws out an intense encounter. Honestly, how long do you think a siege should last?

Guild wars will also have "Win Conditions" if I remember correctly, so it's not like two guilds are going to be able to maintain a constant war against each other either.

Well I think it was actually confirmed that it will take multiple guilds to manage a metropolis. And as far how long a siege should take that really depends. Being that I haven't played it, it's hard to say. In ESO it could take many attempts to bring down the walls or sometimes we attacked from two different sides.

ArchivedUser

I specifically remember IS saying guilds won't own metropolises. However, having some in a metropolis to help the metropolis manage resources would be very helpful. I generally am not the one who cares to take the time to double check these things, but I might this evening.

I don't think it will take guilds, just citizens with a common goal. I could be wrong.

ArchivedUser

There will be ways for guilds to influence regular node politics, there is always someone who will find a workaround. But yes, the intention is for guilds to use the castle mechanic to try and control areas, and city nodes to be more open to varied control. That said, things like guild war declarations and such may only be possible through the castle system (unconfirmed).




In order to throw your hat in the ring and try to become mayor of a node, you have to be a citizen. You have to be a citizen for your vote to count. So while a guild could possibly force all of its members to concentrate in a single node as citizens and influence politics that way, (New guild type, instead of PVE/PVP/PVX, you can now have POL as a tag, meaning they are focused on politics,) it would definitely be the putting your eggs all in one basket sort of thing, and pretty easy to flip for anyone who wanted to contest said control by just bringing in their group, establishing citizenship of a higher number or skill level (military node pvp arena) and taking control.

ArchivedUser

Thanks USE!

ArchivedUser

I really love your idea.  I like calling it even Siege Fatigue.  Also, season I think are really amazing and cannot wait to see them in game.  I think that this can be a thing they can implement over time or later on.  Not everything has to be in game right away; however, this is a really good idea.  I would love to see this come to fruition.

ArchivedUser

rlinden86 said:

I really love your idea.  I like calling it even Siege Fatigue.  Also, season I think are really amazing and cannot wait to see them in game.  I think that this can be a thing they can implement over time or later on.  Not everything has to be in game right away; however, this is a really good idea.  I would love to see this come to fruition.

Same I can't wait to see all the seasons change. And i would really love if it affected sieges.

ArchivedUser

I like the idea, people (in this case our characters) aren't mindless robots that can fight without stopping for ages or that's what I want to believe at the very least, that being said a siege is the attacking of a metropolis so starvation tactics (attackers surround the city and try to make the other side surrender by making them run out of supplies) should be viable, there is something very attractive about playing a rouge, sneaking into the enemy base and buring all their supplies

ArchivedUser

Well, I would like it getting damaged for sure but I also want when we capture it or manage to defend it that workers would come and after like a week in a real life time it would be repaired. 

ArchivedUser

@AutumnLeaf, since all resources going into or out of a siege target is automatic this kind of does play an effect. Unfortunately you just can sit out there and camp to prevent any supplies for hours/days/weeks/etc.

ArchivedUser

@Azathoth that's why I said that starvation tactics should be viable for both sides, I'd just be a pain in the ass to deal with.

Regarding supplies going in and out, I'm pretty sure each node only has one metropolis/city/town so the resources for the defenders would need to come from a different node no ? the attackers would have an advantage in that they have a secure supply route and could starve the defending side to death. Though I guess the game won't have a food system so no need to worry about it.

ArchivedUser

Azathoth said:

@AutumnLeaf, since all resources going into or out of a siege target is automatic this kind of does play an effect. Unfortunately you just can sit out there and camp to prevent any supplies for hours/days/weeks/etc.

AutumnLeaf said:

@Azathoth that's why I said that starvation tactics should be viable for both sides, I'd just be a pain in the ass to deal with.

Regarding supplies going in and out, I'm pretty sure each node only has one metropolis/city/town so the resources for the defenders would need to come from a different node no ? the attackers would have an advantage in that they have a secure supply route and could starve the defending side to death. Though I guess the game won't have a food system so no need to worry about it.

ArchivedUser

AutumnLeaf said:

@Azathoth that's why I said that starvation tactics should be viable for both sides, I'd just be a pain in the ass to deal with.

Regarding supplies going in and out, I'm pretty sure each node only has one metropolis/city/town so the resources for the defenders would need to come from a different node no ? the attackers would have an advantage in that they have a secure supply route and could starve the defending side to death. Though I guess the game won't have a food system so no need to worry about it.

That's where ally's come in and hit the attackers from the flanks and it also makes scouting a key part in attacking and defending which I love